Request A Case Evaluation Or Tax Resolution Development Plan

Get a Tax Resolution Development Plan from us first before you attempt to deal with the IRS. You would meet with Board Certified Tax Attorney Jeffrey B. Kahn at the office location most convenient to you. Jeff will review your situation and go over your options and best strategy to resolve your tax problems. This is more than a mere consultation. You will get the strategy or plan to move forward to resolve your tax problems! Jeff’s office can set up a date and time that is convenient for you and take your credit card information to charge the $475.00 session fee which secures your appointment. By the end of your Tax Resolution Development Plan Session, if you desire to hire us to implement the strategy or plan, Jeff would quote you our fees and apply in full the $475.00 charge for the Tax Resolution Development Plan Session.

Congress has given the IRS potent tools to collect taxes. The IRS can impose liens on a taxpayer’s property and can seize it through levy, all without prior judicial authorization. But for taxpayers who attempt to move or keep their assets offshore to circumvent IRS collections – beware of the writ of ne exeat republica.

The writ of ne exeat republica effectively prevents a person from leaving the Court’s jurisdiction and the IRS has demonstrated that where its efforts to seize a taxpayer’s property to collect his past due taxes, the IRS essentially seized the taxpayer instead.

Predictably, it takes some fairly serious misbehavior to lead a court to bar someone from traveling – and that is what happened to Charles and Kathleen Barrett of Colorado. United States v. Barrett [Case No. 10-CV-02130], 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10888 (D. Colo. Jan. 29, 2014).

Unknown to the Barretts, the government secured a writ of ne exeat republica just before the Barretts had departed for Ecuador. The government then received a default judgment and an order directing the Barretts to repatriate funds that the IRS believed that the Barretts had wired to Ecuador. Thereafter, the Barretts not knowing that this writ and order were outstanding returned to Colorado to attend their daughter’s wedding.

Take-down At The Airport.

After attending their daughter’s wedding, on the morning of August 8, 2013, Charles and Kathleen Barrett were preparing to leave Colorado for the return trip to Cuenca, Ecuador. Charles was leaving from the Denver airport while Kathleen was flying out of Grand Junction, Colorado, where she had been visiting her mother. Both were heading to Miami where they would meet their sons for the flight back to Ecuador.

After Charles checked in at the airlines counter at the Denver Airport, he went to the gate an hour before his flight was scheduled to board. Just as he settled into his seat in the waiting area he was surrounded by three men, one of whom showed his U.S. marshals badge. “You’re not flying anywhere today,” one of the marshals told him. “The judge wants to see you.”

Charles turned over his passport and airplane ticket and was led out of the airport in handcuffs. Four times, Charles recalls, he asked to call to an attorney to represent him before the judge. Four times he was put off. He informed the marshal that his sons, Nathaniel and Jonathan, were waiting for him at the Miami airport and was told that the marshals would contact them. Despite the drama and rough treatment, Barrett understood why he was being taken away but felt confident the issue could be resolved quickly once he talked to the judge.

You see the Barretts owed the IRS money from 2007 when they received a large refund of $217,615 that they were not entitled to as a result of a tax return filed without their signatures by their tax preparer. When contacted by the IRS about this, they filed a corrected return in 2009, but the Barretts kept the money.

On September 1, 2010, the IRS sued the Barretts in Colorado federal court, and eventually obtained a default judgment against them for $351,197 (which amount included penalties and interest). Subsequently, three separate times thereafter the Barretts tried to vacate the default judgment, and three times they failed.

So far, so what — if the Barretts had simply paid their taxes, this would have been an obscure case for a relatively small amount and probably nobody except the parties concerned would have cared much. But the Barretts decided that they weren’t going to pay, and that’s where it starts getting interesting. Apparently the Barretts decided to move to Ecuador and that they deposited their erroneous refund check first into their domestic bank account, and then moved it to another account, and then wire-transferred funds to an account with a bank in Uruguay. The government believed that the Barretts had spirited the $217,615 out of the country.

By this time you are probably thinking, “Yeah, and good luck with the IRS collecting any of that money, against a couple living outside the U.S. with bank accounts outside the U.S.”

But, in the off-chance that the Barretts might show up again, on December 2, 2010 the IRS went to a U.S. District Judge, and asked that an order by the cool name of writ of ne exeat republica be issued against the Barretts to keep them from leaving the U.S. (although they were already long gone), requiring them to post a bond for the $351,197, requiring they be detained by the U.S. Marshal Service pending a hearing, requiring that they produce all their books and records of financial assets and accounts, and restricting them from further transferring or alienating their property.

The writ of ne exeat republica is a little known and seldom used judicial tool dating to the 18th century English royal court. Originally intended to restrict travel for political reasons, its occasional use in the U.S. court system, primarily in family and tax law cases, has often come under question. When it has been invoked, it has been strictly as a civil law action.

Of course, this writ was without little immediate effect since the Barretts had vamoosed. The writ was issued without the Barrett’s knowledge, by the court on an ex parte basis, which meant that only the IRS showed up to talk with the Judge, and the Barretts were unrepresented — a disadvantage inherent to fleeing the country.

The Federal Court Weighs In.

So when Charles was taken into the courtroom on August 8, 2013, he stood before U.S. District Magistrate Judge Boyd Boland who issued the writ of ne exeat republica, ordering the Barretts to turn over their passports and preventing them from leaving the country. Judge Boland read Charles his rights and told him he was not allowed to speak.

An attorney for the IRS asked Judge Boland to put Barrett in jail or post bond of $253,000. The judge responded that the writ did not authorize jailing, only the confiscation of passports and other travel documents. The IRS attorney persisted, claiming the Barretts were flight risks, and the judge finally relented. Charles was fingerprinted and booked into federal jail. However, no charges were filed.

Meanwhile, 200 miles west of Denver in Grand Junction, Kathleen was experiencing the same treatment that Charles was in Denver. She too, was booked into a local jail. It was two days before Charles and other family members knew where she was.

In Miami, not knowing what had happened to their parents, Nathaniel and Jonathan boarded an American Airlines flight to Quito. The U.S. Marshals had not bothered to inform them that their parents had been detained. Assuming that there was a scheduling problem and that the family would be reunited in Ecuador, they remained on the flight.

Kathleen and Charles saw each other for the first time in five days on Tuesday August 13th, at a hearing in the federal courthouse in Denver. Their attorney immediately demanded that the handcuffs and leg irons be removed. This is a civil not a criminal case, he argued and Judge Boland agreed. The marshals, however, refused to obey the judge’s order based on instructions from their superiors. Charles and Kathleen sat through the hearing literally in chains.

On October 11, 2013, the Barretts appeared for a hearing before a U.S. Magistrate Judge. At this time, the IRS identified the assets they believed the Barretts had control of that were available to pay their debt — about $20,000 in cash in various accounts, some real estate in Ecuador, a bunch of minority stock interests in a nutritional food company apparently doing business in Central America, various small assets such as coins and jewelry, a truck and a horse.

Mrs. Barrett claimed that most of the assets were either worthless or not accessible, and at any rate their total value was not much more than $48,000. Of course, these are just the assets that the IRS was able to identify.

As with nearly all the debtors in similar cases involving offshore assets, the Barretts’ biggest failure was their own credibility. Specifically:

The Barretts had obtained a large tax refund through fraud. While they tried to claim that a “maverick accountant” signed their names to the return, when shown their signatures on their returns they claimed that the government forged their signatures. Nonetheless, the Barretts kept the fraudulently-obtained refund.

The Barretts had not voluntarily paid anything to their creditor, and had “loaned” $20,000 to their son just to keep it out of their creditor’s hands.

While basically claiming poverty, the Mr. Barrett had his credit cards paid from an undisclosed account in the U.S., and had wired to another of his sons from $1,500 to $3,000 per month over a 2 to 3 year period.

There was evidence that the Barretts had wire-transferred money between various accounts, and eventually withdrew $48,720 by a cashier’s check, when a wire-transfer failed.

The Barretts had refused to provide bank account or wire-transfer information for their various accounts.

Mrs. Barrett sold shares in a company that was not disclosed to the U.S. Magistrate Judge for $40,000 while at the same time claiming that her sole income was the $430 she received from Social Security. Some of this money was used to pay the Barrett’s legal fees.

After reviewing the available evidence and applying a multifactor test that considered the merits of the governments underlying tax claim, the relative harm to each party and the public interest to be served by the writ, the district court concluded that the writ should stay in place. Ultimately, the court concluded that the Barretts had to stay put until they paid the balance of their tax debt (which after applying prior payments and credits now only amounted to $16,000) and provided satisfactory evidence that their Ecuadorian property truly was unmarketable.

So don’t think that if you flee the country to dodge your debts or avoid reporting your undisclosed foreign bank accounts you will not have any problems when you come back. A U.S. Marshal or your local friendly sheriff will be waiting for you.

Protect yourself.

If you are in danger of wage garnishments or bank levies or having a tax lien placed against your property, stand up to the IRS and your State Tax Agency by getting representation. Tax problems are usually a serious matter and must be handled appropriately so it’s important to that you’ve hired the best lawyer for your particular situation. The tax attorneys at the Law Offices Of Jeffrey B. Kahn, P.C. located in Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco and elsewhere in California are highly skilled in handling tax matters and can effectively represent at all levels with the IRS and State Tax Agencies including criminal tax investigations and attempted prosecutions, undisclosed foreign bank accounts and other foreign assets, and unreported foreign income.

Description: Let the tax attorneys of the Law Offices Of Jeffrey B. Kahn, P.C. resolve your IRS tax problems to allow you to have a fresh start.

Share this entry

A Brilliant Lawyer-Benefit from His Expertise!

I had an issue which required both the expertise of a lawyer with a firm grasp of tax law---one that is always evolving---and that of a highly skilled accountant. And seeking for these qualifications in a single individual, I had the good fortune to discover Mr. Jeffrey Kahn, who indeed proved that a lawyer can be at the same time as an accountant. We worked together for over a year. Regardless of the complexity of the issues as they presented themselves, Mr. Kahn overcome each with admirable skill. At the conclusion of the matter that Mr. Kahn handled, I was utterly satisfied with the outcome, knowing that he had done his very best for me. I would recommend his services to family members, and friends, should they have a need for the rare expertise that Mr. Kahn has.

Richard

Incredibly friendly and extremely knowledgeable

Outstanding team and tax preparation service. I worked with Jeff and his team and this was hands down. Jeff helped me understand the complexities of my taxes. The staff is both incredibly friendly and extremely knowledgeable... Best tax preparation process I've ever dealt with. I can't recommend Jeff's office highly enough!

Mous

Jeff is awesome

We went through a very stressful experience when we came to know about FBAR and OVDI and it disturbed our peace of mind. I found about Jeff online and I was living in India at that time. Jeff was able to understand my situation in one phone call. Our OVDI process started and I was working with Jeff while I was in India. His team is splendid. They would update me on every small things and I couldn't have had a more professional team. They guided me throughout the process , answered every question that I had and I felt a lot better over time. Finally after 4 overs , Jeff was able to resolve my scenario and it was such a relief. I really thank Jeff and his team and would highly recommend his services for anyone going through nightmares with IRS and taxation issues.

Sundar

Detailed and professional

I was looking for an attorney to draw up multiple custom agreements which included a promissory note, security agreement and marketing and support agreement. Mr. Kahn was extremely professional and very detail oriented. He went above and beyond to ensure I was fully protected and suggested new ideas to further enhance the agreements.

Edmund

Extremely Pleased

I highly recommend Mr. Kahn for any legal issues. He was very professional and gave me many ideas on how to resolve my legal issues during our consultation. I hired him soon after and was extremely pleased with how he handled my case. I would recommend him to anyone with tax concerns.

Jackie

Jeff save my company hundreds of thousands of dollars

When it comes to representation in dealing with the IRS there is no better than Jeff Kahn period. Jeff knows his stuff and he knows exactly how to maneuver around and through the IRS. Jeff was relentless at breaking down the IRS and knows all the procedures and all the loopholes, you couldn't have a better attorney in your corner than Jeff Kahn. His team in Walnut Creek are lightning fast at getting things done are extremely professional, understanding and very friendly . Jeff Kahn, save my company literally hundreds of thousands of dollars in unpaid taxes. I can't thank Jeff enough he was absolutely amazing. Jeff Kahn has an excellent reputation here in Northern California and is well known for his ability to take on the IRS. I can't think Jeff and his crew in Walnut Creek enough. Job well done guys.

Eric

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

I have the most gratitude and appreciation for the work Jeffrey did for me to resolve my tax matter. To get to this point of conclusion, I cannot express in words how much this case got me in distress. And now I’m “free man”….literally. I thank you so much.

Yishak

Great Service!

Jeffrey did exactly what he said he would do. He resolved my problem with the IRS quickly and to my complete satisfaction. I found him to be knowledgeable, experienced, and responsive.

Mike

Great Service!

I hired Mr. Kahn to help me with a tax issue that came about after I raised money on GoFundMe for a sick friend. The IRS sent a notice that I owed taxes on the funds collected because they considered the donations as income for me. Mr. Kahn helped me eliminate all taxes due.